Talk:T'Pau (21st century)
Huh. I never even considered the possibility of simply making this T'Pau a different charater. Good call.--Turtletrekker 08:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC) It is indeed a good call. The note, however, about stretching credulity is kind of silly, as Vulcans seem to be able to live well beyond 200 years. (If humans can live to be over 150, Vulcans wouldn't be much longer lived than humans if they could only live to be less than 200. Sarek's death appeared to be unusually young at 202.) Also, since she appears alive in 2376, when she'd be 264, she's older than she would have been if she were in, say her 30s in 2075, meaning she'd have been about 230 in "Amok Time." Now, her being alive in 2376 and born in the 2030s/40s, would have been much more incredulous.--Trebligoniqua 23:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC) :Still, the authors intention was it to be T'Pau from TOS. We're ignoring that to give priority to sources featuring her that were written after "First Steps". Couldn't we just add it to the main T'Pau article and note the long time frame? -- DS9 Forever 14:58, September 20, 2009 (UTC) I agree with DS9 forever. Of course it stretches credulity for her to have such a long lifespan, or to be born before noted in another story. But that's irrelevant. If she was written as the same character and there's no indication in the story that she's a different character, then this is an instance of an inconsistency. If Memory Beta made separate articles for characters each time there was an inconsistency in that character's history, then there'd be multiples of many characters running around the Trek universe without explanation. Zefram Cochrane, for example, has two differing birth dates, and in one version of his backstory he's implied to be native to Alpha Centauri. But there's no separate article for the human inventor who's similar to the Cochrane we know in every way, coincidentally has the same name, and also invented Warp Drive, but was born a few years earlier. Even James T. Kirk has contradictions in his history, with two different fathers in different stories, George and Benjamin. I think one of the best things about Memory Beta is its ability to present all the versions of the story on a subject, even where they contradict, and noting the contradiction so that the reader can decide if it's the same T'Pau or not, for example. One good example of this at work is the Borg history article, which lists a few different versions of the Borg's origin. --Xaqimorp 23:17, January 31, 2012 (UTC) :The examples you give vary because of our policy on canon -- Zefram Cochrane's canon history is the framework of our article, and then the licensed variations are noted as contradictions of canon (with those contradictory facts being excluded from his article history). The same should apply to T'Pau. The Borg is different becasue there's no canon version of Borg history, so the contradictions are broken down with equal weight (as none of them are provably "wrong") -- Captain MKB 01:22, February 1, 2012 (UTC) Even so, the contradiction of canon regarding Zefram Cochrane was noted in the main article about Cochrane, rather than creating a separate article. Granted, it's not part of the main text describing him, but still, it's in the article. I think it's more useful that way, because it puts all the information that has been written about the character in one place, even information that contradicts. Another example of this is in the T'Pau article itself, in which she's noted as having died in one novel, and yet has later appearances. Granted, that's not necessarily a good example because it doesn't involve canon policy. But it serves as a model of a way that contradicting information can be posted, noting the contradction. Also, it gives future authors (who may use Memory Beta as a resource) an opportunity to address the conflict in their works, in the manner that T'Pau's death was dealt with ("I thought she died 50 years ago!"). Or they may even wish to explain it. If info on the 21st century T'Pau is not included in the main article, then an author researching T'Pau may never find out about that story. Also, I haven't read the story in question, but from what I've gathered, it seems T'Pau's appearance isn't explained in detail other than that she's representing Vulcan. For all we know it's a time traveling T'Pau, or maybe the story's date (given as the mid-21st century) is erroneous. Another possibility is that T'Pau gave a false birth date for some reason in her appearance in Enterprise. Assuming that would, of course, be bending canon, much in the same way that it was bending canon when Trip Tucker's death in "These Are the Voyages..." was retconned to have been falsified in . I'm not saying that we here at memory beta should make assumptions like that, certainly not. What I'm saying is, there are a lot of possibilities by which the discrepancy could be explained, especially in the Star Trek universe where many things are possible. My point is that we don't know why T'Pau appeared before she was born, but that doesn't automatically mean it's a separate character in that story. There are many alternate explanations to explain the discrepancy. I will agree that it being a separate character is one strong possibility, but since we really don't know for sure if that's the case or not (as that is not stated in any source), we shouldn't assume one way or another. Xaqimorp 20:42, February 3, 2012 (UTC) :I'm also unschooled in the issues present here - i wasn't speaking to the T'Pau case as you observed it - i was commenting on the problems of comparing it to cases that are approached differently (the Borg and Cochrane are different cases, as i said). :So I'm gathering that with canon T'Pau being relatively young in the year 215X, we are taking that as a contradiction with her being alive in the 21st century? Haven't read the story, but I'm not sure what her 'canon' age is/was. Also, how definite are the dates of the story? if the character is intended to be one and the same, perhaps the dates that conflict with canon could be questioned more readily than the entire fact of the character's existence? -- Captain MKB 21:34, February 3, 2012 (UTC) Yeah, agreed. As for T'Pau's canon age, I don't know for sure-- I looked it up on Memory Alpha, though, which also has it as the same year, and that information is referenced to her appearance in Enterprise. I'll have to rewatch the episode for sure, though. And I haven't read the story, so I don't know about that. Xaqimorp 04:46, February 7, 2012 (UTC)